Librarian perspective: Q&A with Curtis Brundy, Associate University Librarian for Scholarly Communications and Collections at Iowa State University

“[Q:] Can you talk about the divide between Scholarly Comms Librarians and Collections Librarians and how this might be bridged?

[A:] Libraries have traditionally placed their scholarly communications and collections work in distinct organizational silos. This has meant, in many cases, that the values that inform a library’s work in scholarly communications do not actually inform the work done in collections. This is an issue of values alignment. If we care about information equity, privacy, and intellectual freedom with our scholarly communications work, then we should also care about these things with our collections work. At Iowa State, we have just adopted a new collection and open strategies policy that centers our library’s values in our collection work. We have also integrated our scholarly communications efforts with our collections efforts to eliminate organizational barriers.

It is not uncommon for US research libraries to spend close to half of their operating budget on collections and acquisitions. Aligning our scholarly communications work and values with collections helps a library to shift this spending from traditional collection procurement to open investing, which will help incentivize and support the transition to a more equitable scholarly publishing system. I believe these types of changes are becoming more common in US libraries….”

Open and Shut?: The OA interviews: Richard Gallagher, President & Editor-in-Chief, Annual Reviews

“Annual Reviews (AR) recently announced that over the next 18 months it aims to make its entire portfolio of 51 academic journals freely available under a new journal publication model known as Subscribe to Open (S2O).

Annual Reviews is a pioneer of S2O, having first trialled it in 2017 with its journal Annual Review of Public Health. A number of AR’s other journals have subsequently been converted to S2O and the publisher is now hoping to migrate its entire journal portfolio to the new model….

In light of AR’s announcement, I emailed a number of questions to the President & Editor-in-Chief of AR, Richard Gallagher. Those questions, and Gallagher’s replies, are published below….”

Towards a new reward system for open science

The transition to an open science system affects the entire research process. The reward systems also need to be adjusted in order to support and mirror the open research landscape, but what will this work look like, and what will change? We met Gustav Nilsonne, chair of the European working group dealing with the issue and a participant in the SUHF working group on merit reviews.

Interviews with the lab protocol community – insights from an Academic Editor and a reviewer – EveryONE

“What do you think are the benefits of lab protocols for open science?

RK: PLOS ONE journal in collaboration with protocols.io has developed a unique and state-of-the-art platform for publishing lab protocols. This is a well-timed and useful innovation. The development of scientific knowledge is based on a variety of methodological approaches bordering on art. Because of the increasing complexity of scientific methods and their diversity, an appropriate forum or open science platform is needed, where the research community can present the best solution and point out the problems that may be encountered in other laboratories. Such a platform should of course be open, and in this form, it is really effective.

AF: Improving data reproducibility in research is one of today’s most important issues to address. Providing clear and detailed protocols, without limitation of words or space, is an effective way to communicate optimized protocols. This will directly help to improve data reproducibility between labs, as well as provide a thorough record of procedures that have been published in parallel. Improving communication of optimized protocols helps to drive robust research, allowing people to build their own research on already thorough studies, and not spend excessive time optimizing protocols based on poorly executed or explained protocols. …”

Annual Reviews’ Subscribe To Open: From Idea To Full Adoption – The Scholarly Kitchen

“This April, Annual Reviews announced that for 2023 they will offer all 51 of their journals under the Subscribe to Open (S2O) business model, with the intention of becoming a fully open access (OA) publisher.

Three years ago, I interviewed Richard Gallagher, President and Editor-in-Chief of Annual Reviews, and Kamran Naim, Director of Partnerships and Initiatives, about the organization’s rationale for pursuing OA and the details of S2O. Since that time, I’ve kept in touch with Richard and have been intrigued by his strategy to expand the reach of S2O based on experimentation, iteration, learning, and evidence.

With this latest announcement expanding the S2O model to all of Annual Reviews’ publications, it was time to speak with  Richard again!…”

Diversity matters in digital scholarly technology – A conversation with Mark Hahnel

“Mark Hahnel is the CEO and founder of Figshare, which he created whilst completing his PhD in stem cell biology at Imperial College London. Figshare currently provides research data infrastructure for institutions, publishers and funders globally. He is passionate about open science and the potential it has to revolutionize the research community. For the last eight years, Mark has been leading the development of research data infrastructure, with the core aim of reusable and interoperable academic data. Mark sits on the board of DataCite and the advisory board for the Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ). He was on the judging panel for the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Wellcome Trust Open Science prize and acted as an advisor for the Springer Nature master classes….”

An open future for education : Maha Bali

“In Episode 3 we speak to Maha Bali. Maha Bali comes from a family of medical doctors but she fancied studying computer science. This was not to last however, as it didn’t gel with personality as an extrovert. She then made the happy option of becoming an educator. 

She is currently an Associate Professor of Practice at the Centre for Learning and Teaching at the American University in Cairo.

Maha’s love of interacting and connecting with people led her to co-found Virtually Connecting, a grassroots movement that challenges academic gatekeeping at conferences. She is also the co-facilitator of Equity Unbound, an equity-focused, open, connected intercultural learning curriculum….”

Indigenous Knowledge and Research Infrastructure: An Interview with Katharina Ruckstuhl – The Scholarly Kitchen

“Indigenous knowledge, defined by UNESCO as “the understandings, skills and philosophies developed by societies with long histories of interaction with their natural surroundings”, is increasingly — if belatedly — being recognized as making a significant contribution to the research endeavor. However, it is poorly supported by the current research infrastructure, which was developed to serve the needs of the global North, especially in the sciences. Dr Katharina Ruckstuhl of the University of Otago, New Zealand, gave a powerful account of this in her recent NISO Plus keynote, Research Infrastructure for the Pluriverse, as well as sharing her thoughts on how we can can implement research infrastructure processes that support pluriversal approaches….”

How the Wayback Machine Is Saving Digital Ukraine – IEEE Spectrum

“When the Ukrainian invasion began, the Internet Archive launched several efforts to capture the Ukrainian Internet. Its archivists launched a high-volume crawl through hundreds of thousands of websites ending in “.ua.” They selected specific sites to archive as completely as possible, including government, education, and library sites. And they targeted journalism, particularly Ukrainian news sites and aggregators. The organization has also been supporting others working to save Ukraine’s digital resources, including SUCHO (Saving Ukrainian Cultural Heritage Online) and the Archive Team.

Mark Graham, director of the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine, explained this dive into Ukraine’s Internet and how it differs from the Wayback Machine’s usual approach to preserving digital history. …”

How to make it right: a Rights Retention Pilot by the University of Cambridge ahead of shaping a full institutional policy | Plan S

In 2008 Harvard’s Faculty of Arts & Sciences voted unanimously to adopt a ground-breaking open access policy. Since then, over 70 other institutions, including other Harvard faculties, Stanford and MIT, have adopted similar policies based on the Harvard model. In Europe such institutional policies have, so far, been slow to get off the ground.

We are beginning to see that situation change.

The University of Cambridge has recently established a pilot rights retention scheme on an opt-in basis, with a view to informing the next revision of the University’s Open Access policy. In the following interview, Niamh Tumelty, Head of Open Research Services at the University of Cambridge, describes the purpose of the pilot, how researchers can benefit from it and shares her tips for any other institution that might consider adopting a similar policy….”

Library perspective: balancing investments and sustainability in Open Access

“The team at COPIM recently shared your CommonPlace blog post “Balancing Investments in Open Access: Sustainability and Innovation”. We found it really interesting to see evidence of libraries grappling with how to evaluate the proliferation of new OA models. What has the response been to your article?

One response was that Sharla Lair and Curtis Brundy edited a series of articles in CommonPlace, called “The Global Transition to Open.” It was gratifying to see that other libraries are also struggling with some of the issues I mentioned in my piece–how to keep up with all of the new open publishing models, and how to choose which initiatives to support. One potential way to combat this, as Marco Tullney and others noted, is to develop established workflows and evaluation criteria. I thought Alexia Hudson-Ward made a particularly compelling case that DEIA should be a core component of any such criteria. 

I’m also intrigued by the fact that some libraries seem to have dedicated, separate budget lines for supporting open scholarly initiatives. At the same time, I’m not convinced that having a dedicated budget line would really make the decision making process and administrative issues easier for us at Temple, as Demmy Verkebe says it does at KU Leuven. And honestly, I worry that separating open from the rest of collections might prevent us from seeing the big picture around how exactly this transition should happen. …”

Claire Redhead: The argument for open access to all scholarship has never been more relevant

“Claire Redhead is one of the leading international open access advocators. She is heading Open Access Scholarly Publishing Association (OASPA) as its Executive Director. Prior to this, she was a Membership and Communications Manager at OASPA and worked for over two decades in academic publishing. With such a rich experience, her leadership role in the growing open access movement has been acknowledged as key to the rapid growth and expansion of open access throughout the global scholarly community.

In this interview for Open Interview with Santosh C. Hulagabali, Redhead talks exclusively on the recent trends and developments in global open access movement. She shares her humble beginning in publishing and open access fields and also her insights in further building OASPA for achieving its cause. She candidly shares her thoughts on some significant key changes, developments and indicators in open access publishing practices in the light of her experiments and professional practices at OASPA….”

“Our policy is an affirmation that the University of Edinburgh fully supports authors in their open access practices” | Plan S

In 2008 Harvard’s Faculty of Arts & Sciences voted unanimously to adopt a ground-breaking open access policy. Since then, over 70 other institutions, including other Harvard faculties, Stanford and MIT, have adopted similar policies based on the Harvard model. In Europe such institutional policies have, so far, been slow to get off the ground.

We are beginning to see that situation change.

The University of Edinburgh adopted its Research Publications & Copyright policy in 2021. In the following interview, Theo Andrew, Scholarly Communications Manager at the University of Edinburgh, explains how this policy was developed, describes the benefits for the University’s staff and shares his tips for any other institution that might consider adopting a similar policy….”